Facebook Friend Not a Reason for Judicial Bias

04 June 2013 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Author(s): Peter Vogel

When the Judge got a Facebook message from a friend the Judge did not read the message and posted a copy in the Court files and told authorities to avoid any bias. The Facebook friend was the father of a woman who asked that the defendant get the maximum penalty for abusing his daughter. But once the Judge realized the inappropriate use of Facebook the Judge did not read the message. The defendant appealed the lengthy jail sentence claiming that the Facebook friendship biased the Judge.

In a case of first impression Justice Mary Murphy of the Texas 5th Court of Appeals wrote in the case of in William Scott Youkers v. State of Texas:

A reasonable person in possession of all of the facts in this case likely would conclude the contact between the judge and the father did not cause the judge to abandon his judicial role of impartiality; besides the evidence that the judge and the father’s acquaintance was limited, any appearance of bias created by the Facebook communications was dismissed quickly by the judge’s handling of the situation.

Since 2009 the Florida Supreme Court has precluded lawyers from being Facebook friends with Judges if they have cases before them, but in Texas (and many other states) lawyers contribute monies to support election of Judges so being Facebook friends probably means less.

Without question Social Media connections between Judges and lawyers will continue to be an important issue and no doubt we will see many more court opinions on this subject.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.


Related Services